W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2007

RE: Not described in words

From: Slatin, John M <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 10:46:00 -0500
Message-ID: <6EED8F7006A883459D4818686BCE3B3B05B206DA@MAIL01.austin.utexas.edu>
To: "Bailey, Bruce" <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>, "Sean Hayes" <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com>, "Gregg Vanderheiden" <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>


<current>
All functionality of the content is operable through a keyboard
interface without requiring specific timings for individual keystrokes,
except where the underlying task requires time-dependent analog input.
</current>

If (as Bruce notes below) the problem is about how long an individual
keystroke lasts, how about something like this?

<proposed>
All functionality of the content is operable through a keyboard
interface without requiring a specific duration for any individual
keystroke, except where the underlying task requires time-dependent
analog input. </proposed>


John

"Good design is accessible design."

Dr. John M. Slatin, Director 
Accessibility Institute
University of Texas at Austin 
FAC 248C 
1 University Station G9600 
Austin, TX 78712 
ph 512-495-4288, fax 512-495-4524 
email john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu
Web http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility 



-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Bailey, Bruce
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 7:39 AM
To: Sean Hayes; Gregg Vanderheiden
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: Not described in words



<current>
All functionality of the content is operable through a keyboard
interface without requiring specific timings for individual keystrokes,
except where the underlying task requires time-dependent analog input.
</current>

> GV "The first is the requirement that keyboard input not have
> timing requirements on it.  That is you can require the 
> person to tap out Morse code on a key and call that keyboard access".

It is subtle, but from my recent conversation with Gregg I understand
that "specific timing for individual keystrokes" is about *how* the keys
are pressed and not *when* the keys are pressed.  I used Frogger to
illustrate the difference, but Morse code could work as an example if it
uses two keys (one for each tone).

> SH:  Maybe something like:
> "All functionality is operable through a keyboard interface,
> except where the command or outcome cannot be reproduced by 
> [a small set of strokes]"

I think this is good, but it is almost recursive in how it excludes a
built-in Mouse-Keys-Like feature.

[And yes, I do believe that such a possibility must be considered. I
have had more than one developer cite Mouse Keys (at the OS level) as
satisfying 508 1194.21(a)!]

I also think the current wording is okay, but ambiguous on the timing
aspect, and I am at a loss to provide a suggestion for improving it.  Is
the How to Meet the place to explain that games that use timing as play
element do not automatically fail 2.1.1?  I would like to see the
examples for illustrating "time-dependant analog input" to be less
exotic.  (Maybe Paint and Mine Sweeper, instead of Water Coloring and
Helicopter Simulator?)

Of course, I still feel "not textually discernable" is easier to parse
than "time-dependant analog input" so perhaps my judgment is suspect...
Received on Monday, 19 March 2007 15:46:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:49 GMT